Chiz takes oath, setting in motion impeach trial

Robin wants to ‘effectively terminate’ trial

MANILA, Philippines — After hours of plenary debate, Senate President Francis Escudero took his oath last night as presiding officer of the impeachment court, setting in motion the trial of Vice President Sara Duterte.

The other senators will take their oath at 4 p.m. today to sit as judges in the court. The Senate convenes as an impeachment court tomorrow, June 11.

The senators reached the decision as multisectoral groups camped out at the gates of the Senate, demanding the start of the trial “forthwith” as stated in the Constitution.

As senators were debating a motion pushed by minority senators Koko Pimentel and Risa Hontiveros for the immediate start of the trial process, Sen. Robinhood Padilla filed a resolution declaring the impeachment proceedings “effectively terminated.”

Citing “constitutional deadlines” such as the end of the 19th Congress on June 30, Padilla’s Senate Resolution 1371 argued that the chamber would be unable to act on the matter within the term of the current senators, which expires at noon of that date.

Padilla’s resolution referenced a manifestation made by Senate Majority Leader Francis Tolentino during the chamber’s session on June 2, in which he warned that delaying the trial until just days before adjournment would raise “serious constitutional concerns.”

“The Articles of Impeachment against Vice President Sara Duterte had long been transmitted to this Chamber 117 days ago, yet the impeachment trial – a process that, under the Constitution, must commence ‘forthwith’ upon receipt – has been delayed for several months,” Tolentino said, as quoted by the resolution.

He emphasized that the term “forthwith” in the Constitution denotes an imperative for immediate action, and that initiating trial just before adjournment undermines both due process and the Senate’s institutional integrity.

Motion to start

In a charged session on the Senate floor, Minority Leader Aquilino Pimentel III moved for the upper chamber to immediately convene as an impeachment court, triggering a lengthy debate on constitutional duty, procedure and political timing.

During his privilege speech in the plenary session, Pimentel introduced a motion prodding the Senate to suspend all its legislative business, convene as the impeachment court at the moment he ends his speech and for Senate President Francis Escudero to immediately take his oath as presiding officer of the court and administer the oath to all present members of the Senate.

In his motion, Pimentel also urged that the court call to order Duterte’s impeachment, arrange the trial calendar, have the Articles of Impeachment read at 2 p.m. on Tuesday (June 10) by the House prosecutors and thereafter issue the writ of summons to the Vice President.

“Mr. President, any further delay not only undermines the explicit mandate of the Constitution and our Rules. It risks eroding public trust in the Senate’s capacity to uphold the accountability of public officers and the rule of law,” Pimentel said.

“Not only do many believe that the Senate is heading to a ‘NO TRIAL’ scenario, worse, many have opined that, simply by inaction, by merely refusing to convene as the impeachment court, the Senate seems to believe that it can effectively dismiss or defeat an impeachment complaint duly filed and transmitted by the House of Representatives,” he added.

Before Escudero could acknowledge the motion for objections to the floor, he allowed senators to ask questions about the motion – triggering nearly two hours of debates.

Among the first to interject was Sen. Joel Villanueva, who said he supported the spirit of the motion but raised procedural questions such as whether if the court convenes on Monday, what would happen to the parties who need to be sent notices that the court has been called to order.

“I just want to put on record that under our rules, the SP must actually issue a notice to the House of Representatives,” Villanueva said, citing Senate Rules and previous letters from the Senate President dated June 2 and 11.

“If the motion of the minority will push through, what would happen if you have not issued any notice, Mr. President? What would happen to your letters?” he added.

Villanueva was answered by Pimentel, who argued that the impeachment court would only be tackling preliminaries of the trial on the same day and not the trial itself.

Sen. Juan Miguel Zubiri, who openly described the impeachment case against Duterte as “weak,” sided with Pimentel and said the chamber must do its constitutional mandate.

Duterte allies Senators Ronald dela Rosa and Padilla, meanwhile, voiced their strong opposition to the impeachment trial without addressing the merits of the motion, saying the “timing” of the impeachment could not be worse as the country already is divided.

Meanwhile, Tolentino insisted on his position that the impeachment may not carry over to the 20th Congress, distinguishing the impeachment court from other constitutionally created bodies.

“The impeachment trial court is not periodic. It is not regularly created,” he said.

“We cite decisions of the SC interpreting the 1935 Constitution… It’s different from regularly created ad hoc bodies like electoral tribunals,” he added.

In response, Minority deputy leader Risa Hontiveros kept on nudging colleagues back to the motion introduced by Pimentel, signaling that the debates have deviated from the motion.

She also rejected the idea that the Senate should vote on whether to convene as an impeachment court at all.

“To convene at all is not to be voted upon… Let’s just follow the Constitution,” she said, citing jurisprudence that impeachment is not a “periodic” function and thus not disrupted by a shift in Congress.

Senators Grace Poe, Sherwin Gatchalian and Raffy Tulfo, meanwhile, backed calls that the Senate must convene as an impeachment court.

The debates ended with Escudero reiterating his defense on why the impeachment was delayed.

This was followed by nearly two hours of suspended session.

Expedited trial rejected

Meanwhile, Escudero shot down Tolentino’s proposal to hold an expedited impeachment trial for Duterte that would end in 19 days, saying it would be unfair to restrict both the prosecution and defense to compressed schedules just for the sake of wrapping things up quickly.

“For me it’s very difficult to limit the presentation of evidence on both sides to one day each, simply because you want it done at the soonest possible time. It’s not indicated that trial should be done at the soonest possible time, especially that everything is too compressed,” Escudero told reporters.

Earlier, Tolentino proposed an expedited timeline that would see a verdict on Duterte’s impeachment case on June 30.

Escudero reiterated his position that while the impeachment complaint can continue past June 30 – the end of the 19th Congress – it is up to both the current and incoming Senates to decide whether to push through with the trial.

Meanwhile, amid protests prodding the Senate to convene as an impeachment court, Escudero dismissed allegations that he was derailing the impeachment process in favor of Duterte and stressed that while he “doesn’t like” her, he also harbors no anger towards her.

Addressing the mounting calls of universities, religious and civic groups for the Senate to comply with its duty under the Constitution, Escudero said his position as presiding officer of the impeachment court and as president of the Senate would be guided by fairness and not by pressure coming from critics.

Retired Supreme Court (SC) associate justice Antonio Carpio also opposed Tolentino’s proposal, stressing the impeachment trial can continue in the 20th Congress.

“His (Tolentino) assumption is that the trial does not cross over. It does. It is indicated in the Constitution that public officers shall be accountable to the people at all times. That means the legislative calendar cannot extinguish the accountability,” he said over dzMM Teleradyo yesterday.

He cited impeachment trials in the United Kingdom, as well as the United States, where proceedings crossed over from one parliament to the next or from one Congress to the next.

Carpio also said impeachment proceedings do not involve the legislative function of Congress, therefore it should not abide by the legislative calendar. There is likewise no provision in the Constitution that prohibits the crossover of proceedings.

“There is no reason why it should be finished before June 30 because it crosses over. You cannot tell Congress to revise the Articles of Impeachment. The obligation of the Senate is to hear and decide those Articles of Impeachment,” he said.

Carpio believes the Senate has already violated the Constitution for not proceeding with the trial four months after the Articles of Impeachment have been filed.

“Trial shall proceed forthwith – that has already been violated. It has been four months. That’s no longer forthwith, that’s more than unreasonable delay,” he said.

The Senate will likewise commit a constitutional violation if it will dismiss the impeachment case without holding a trial, saying it is the obligation of the Senate to hold one.

“Everybody will go to the SC if the Senate majority will dismiss the case,” he said.

‘Senate committing a sin’

Lingayen Dagupan Archbishop Socrates Villegas yesterday denounced the apparent attempt to delay the impeachment trial of Duterte.

“To delay the trial or even to abort it is to suppress the truth. It is a sin. The opponent, the devil, is rightly called Prince of Lies. It is a sin to suppress or conceal the truth,” Villegas said.

Villegas added that the nation has a right to the truth that can only be established by law and evidence.

“To deprive the people of the full truth is a form of robbery. It is keeping something not yours. It is a sin. When motivated by selfish ambition and the prioritization of personal desires, gratification and comfort, the delay of the process of pursuing the truth is a sin. It smacks of negligence and laziness. Not to pursue the truth when you have the capacity to know it forthwith is a grave sin of omission. It is morally unacceptable,” Villegas noted.

According to Villegas, procrastination is a form of laziness, which leads to the neglect of responsibilities, tasks or opportunities, which can be interpreted as a lack of diligence or commitment.

‘VP Ready’

Meanwhile, the camp of Duterte reiterated its readiness amid the ongoing Senate discussion on the start of the impeachment trial.

“Should the Senate choose to proceed, we stand ready to confront the charges and expose the baselessness of the accusations against the Vice President,” Duterte’s defense team said in a statement.

“The defense team has received several requests for comment regarding the calls for the Senate to immediately proceed with the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Z. Duterte. We deem it proper to refrain from commenting on matters that are exclusive and internal to the Senate. However, we reiterate our firm position that the initiation of the impeachment process – particularly the fourth impeachment complaint – suffers from serious constitutional infirmities,” it added.

“The impeachment process must never be weaponized to harass, silence or eliminate political opponents. It is a constitutional mechanism, not a political tool,” the defense team further noted. — Bella Cariaso, Daphne Galvez, Cesar Ramirez